How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now? (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

Maybe my use of diehard is a little over the top. We all define level of being a fan differently. Guess because I think of the people that I talk football with have a great amount of knowledge of the whole league and not just the Packers.There is a large group of Packer fans that became fans or bigger fans during the 90s. You have the wifes that started to watch with husband, fans that use to not care because they did not want to watch a loosing team, and you have a younger generation that till this year only knew one starting QB in Green Bay. IMO most of these people are havnig a tough time adjusting to the new Packers. Their hero is gone and all that they stood for has left the building, over time about these fans will either go away or jump on the Rodgers wagon. This group most likely doesn't follow much football besides the Packers and doesnt care how the NFL works and that teams need to rebuild from time to time. They think the Packers should win every game and be in the Super Bowl almost every year.

I said it this summer and I still see it in too many places...alot of it seems to be out of emotion. Im not saying its everyone...but many who are hammering the Packers decision and hate Ted Thompson are acting more out of emotion because Ted let their hero go.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Maybe my use of diehard is a little over the top. We all define level of being a fan differently. Guess because I think of the people that I talk football with have a great amount of knowledge of the whole league and not just the Packers.There is a large group of Packer fans that became fans or bigger fans during the 90s. You have the wifes that started to watch with husband, fans that use to not care because they did not want to watch a loosing team, and you have a younger generation that till this year only knew one starting QB in Green Bay. IMO most of these people are havnig a tough time adjusting to the new Packers. Their hero is gone and all that they stood for has left the building, over time about these fans will either go away or jump on the Rodgers wagon. This group most likely doesn't follow much football besides the Packers and doesnt care how the NFL works and that teams need to rebuild from time to time. They think the Packers should win every game and be in the Super Bowl almost every year.

I said it this summer and I still see it in too many places...alot of it seems to be out of emotion. Im not saying its everyone...but many who are hammering the Packers decision and hate Ted Thompson are acting more out of emotion because Ted let their hero go.

i will admit to letting my emotions play a big part in all this. I grew up in california and moved to Milwaukee in the 80's. I was certainly not a packer fan. Then along comes this crazy QB who I start to say to myself, hey this guy is fun to watch. I remember all the debates about him during his second year. How people said he was no good, too many bad passes, uncoachable, etc. I heard those same debates again in 1999 and 2000 when he had a couple of bad years. Then again a couple years ago. It almost seemed to me there were just too many people who wanted to see the guy fail. He always bounced back though. I became a packer fan because of Favre. I did not want that to be split up. It was a great run. I didnt want that game against the Giants to be my last Packer/Favre memory. This is also why the Pack making the playoffs is such a big deal to me. I will never be convinced that the Packers would not have repeated as division winners with Favre. I think he had too good a connection with Driver, Jennings, Tauscher, Clifton, and many others. When I look at the depth chart from week 5 of last year( the only one i found from 2007) It was identical except for Favre for the starters and tons of backups were the same. I doubt they would have gone 13-3 again, but 11-5 was pretty much a lock( at least in my head). If the Packers miss the playoffs I would have rather had Favre for even just one more year. If they make the playoffs with Rodgers I will certainly admit (minus Favre winning MVP and leading the Jets to the SB which is very unlikely) that TT did his job well, at least on this one.

 

[Sabertooth]

Whatever...Im not going to get into a big drawn out bunch of crap over something so little like this with you or phase today. You all can enjoy trying to again pile on.

But its clear in this thread again your opinions are in the minority of fans on this board.

I think the majority of voters voted for Bush in 2004 too.after a little more time, do you think they would have done the same?

If the pack doesnt make the playoffs after going 13-3 with very few changes made and in a weak division and the Jets make the playoffs after having a crappy year last year I think it will be pretty hard to argue that the Packers made the right decision for this year.

If the Pack makes the playoffs and so do the Jets, I will agree to call it a wash from a football standpoint, but being the wrong move out of respect to a team legend.

If the Pack makes the playoffs and the Jets dont, well then I would say TT is vindicated.

It really is that simple. The team rodgers inherited was a playoff team. Not because of guessing, hope, speculation, etc. They had good players that had been there before and a weak division.

It's not that simple at all. Every year is different in the NFL. The schedule changes, players get injured, or are ineffective because of playing with injuries. A close game that went our way last year, maybe doesn't go our way this year. Players improve or decline from year to year. Anyone who's watched all the Packers' games knows that there are many reasons the Packers have struggled sometimes this year, and the QB position isn't really one of them. Until this week we've been getting dominated in the trenches, and you can't win with any QB when that happens. Also, the Jets have rebuilt their offensive line and made improvements on defense as well. Arguably, the addition of Favre isn't even their most important offseason move.

The sports media likes to sell that the QB is the only player on the field that affects wins and losses, but knowledgable football fans know better.

If Favre was the sole reason for the 13-3 record last year, then what happened in the two previous years?

Has anyone stated that Favre was the sole reason for the 13-3 record last year?

I know I never did.All I have pointed out was that he was the only major change from last year to this year.

How about James Jones being injured? How about Ryan Grant's lack of success? How about offensive line penalties? How about Clifton playing at a Pro Bowl level last season and getting pwned this season? Nothing major about those huh?

 

[phthalatemagic]

Whatever...Im not going to get into a big drawn out bunch of crap over something so little like this with you or phase today. You all can enjoy trying to again pile on.

But its clear in this thread again your opinions are in the minority of fans on this board.

I think the majority of voters voted for Bush in 2004 too.after a little more time, do you think they would have done the same?

If the pack doesnt make the playoffs after going 13-3 with very few changes made and in a weak division and the Jets make the playoffs after having a crappy year last year I think it will be pretty hard to argue that the Packers made the right decision for this year.

If the Pack makes the playoffs and so do the Jets, I will agree to call it a wash from a football standpoint, but being the wrong move out of respect to a team legend.

If the Pack makes the playoffs and the Jets dont, well then I would say TT is vindicated.

It really is that simple. The team rodgers inherited was a playoff team. Not because of guessing, hope, speculation, etc. They had good players that had been there before and a weak division.

It's not that simple at all. Every year is different in the NFL. The schedule changes, players get injured, or are ineffective because of playing with injuries. A close game that went our way last year, maybe doesn't go our way this year. Players improve or decline from year to year. Anyone who's watched all the Packers' games knows that there are many reasons the Packers have struggled sometimes this year, and the QB position isn't really one of them. Until this week we've been getting dominated in the trenches, and you can't win with any QB when that happens. Also, the Jets have rebuilt their offensive line and made improvements on defense as well. Arguably, the addition of Favre isn't even their most important offseason move.

The sports media likes to sell that the QB is the only player on the field that affects wins and losses, but knowledgable football fans know better.

If Favre was the sole reason for the 13-3 record last year, then what happened in the two previous years?

Has anyone stated that Favre was the sole reason for the 13-3 record last year?

You certainly enjoy repeating team records and that as your sole reason for Favre > Rodgers.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

If the Packers miss the playoffs I would have rather had Favre for even just one more year. If they make the playoffs with Rodgers I will certainly admit (minus Favre winning MVP and leading the Jets to the SB which is very unlikely) that TT did his job well, at least on this one.

This is fair enough springroll and certainly reasonable people can have differing opinions on matters like this. For me, however, the point is that Thompson had to make a tough decision last summer in a huge pressure-cooker situation and without the luxury of a crystal ball to tell him what the future would hold. We will judge his decision not based on what he knew at the time but what we know after it has all played out, as you note above. Of course Thompson knows that is the case as does any professional who gets paid to make difficult decisions and run a company with forsight. Obviously, bringing Favre back would have been the easy and safe thing for a GM to do and I think many if not most GM's in the NFL would typically make the easy choice and protect their job. No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team. More importantly, it would send a bad message to the players that Thompson and McCarthy are not in charge of the team. I am very happy that Thompson had the courage to stick to his guns, not waiver under enormous pressure, and keep control of his team. I don't believe the Packers would be any better off this year with Favre, but, more importantly, I am certain this was the best move for the long-term success of the team. I think its a great time to be a Packer fan.

 

[sho nuff]

If the Packers miss the playoffs I would have rather had Favre for even just one more year. If they make the playoffs with Rodgers I will certainly admit (minus Favre winning MVP and leading the Jets to the SB which is very unlikely) that TT did his job well, at least on this one.

This is fair enough springroll and certainly reasonable people can have differing opinions on matters like this. For me, however, the point is that Thompson had to make a tough decision last summer in a huge pressure-cooker situation and without the luxury of a crystal ball to tell him what the future would hold. We will judge his decision not based on what he knew at the time but what we know after it has all played out, as you note above. Of course Thompson knows that is the case as does any professional who gets paid to make difficult decisions and run a company with forsight. Obviously, bringing Favre back would have been the easy and safe thing for a GM to do and I think many if not most GM's in the NFL would typically make the easy choice and protect their job. No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team. More importantly, it would send a bad message to the players that Thompson and McCarthy are not in charge of the team. I am very happy that Thompson had the courage to stick to his guns, not waiver under enormous pressure, and keep control of his team. I don't believe the Packers would be any better off this year with Favre, but, more importantly, I am certain this was the best move for the long-term success of the team. I think its a great time to be a Packer fan.

Agreed...and not only that...we have found out alot about Rodgers. He has handled this thing far better (not just in his play) than I think anyone could have thought. Just a complete pro about it from day 1.And its not just him. The whole team seems to have done the same and not worried about what might have been with #4. They just go out and play.Give the team and the staff alot of credit for that for sure.

 

[Tau837]

How about Ryan Grant's lack of success?

Grant is looking a lot better recently, and seems poised to have success down the stretch. Maybe Thompson should be taking some heat for not getting his deal done sooner to get him into camp sooner. Had that happened, maybe he never hurts his hamstring, and maybe he would have started playing well sooner.I think the bloom has to come off Thompson's rose a bit now. Throughout this debate over Favre, many have strongly backed Thompson, based on the fact that he had done such a good job in his tenure. After last season, it certainly seemed he had done a masterful job rebuilding the team. What a difference 10 games makes. And, while he may have been right in his evaluation of Rodgers, he still botched the handling of the Favre situation. Now look at Grant emerging, and perhaps he handled that situation poorly as well.

 

[Tau837]

No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team.

What have the Packers done with that cap space? IIRC, they had $20M of available cap space, and spent about $12M of that on Rodgers' contract extension. Have they used the other ~$8M?

 

[parasaurolophus]

Whatever...Im not going to get into a big drawn out bunch of crap over something so little like this with you or phase today. You all can enjoy trying to again pile on.

But its clear in this thread again your opinions are in the minority of fans on this board.

I think the majority of voters voted for Bush in 2004 too.after a little more time, do you think they would have done the same?

If the pack doesnt make the playoffs after going 13-3 with very few changes made and in a weak division and the Jets make the playoffs after having a crappy year last year I think it will be pretty hard to argue that the Packers made the right decision for this year.

If the Pack makes the playoffs and so do the Jets, I will agree to call it a wash from a football standpoint, but being the wrong move out of respect to a team legend.

If the Pack makes the playoffs and the Jets dont, well then I would say TT is vindicated.

It really is that simple. The team rodgers inherited was a playoff team. Not because of guessing, hope, speculation, etc. They had good players that had been there before and a weak division.

It's not that simple at all. Every year is different in the NFL. The schedule changes, players get injured, or are ineffective because of playing with injuries. A close game that went our way last year, maybe doesn't go our way this year. Players improve or decline from year to year. Anyone who's watched all the Packers' games knows that there are many reasons the Packers have struggled sometimes this year, and the QB position isn't really one of them. Until this week we've been getting dominated in the trenches, and you can't win with any QB when that happens. Also, the Jets have rebuilt their offensive line and made improvements on defense as well. Arguably, the addition of Favre isn't even their most important offseason move.

The sports media likes to sell that the QB is the only player on the field that affects wins and losses, but knowledgable football fans know better.

If Favre was the sole reason for the 13-3 record last year, then what happened in the two previous years?

Has anyone stated that Favre was the sole reason for the 13-3 record last year?

I know I never did.All I have pointed out was that he was the only major change from last year to this year.

How about James Jones being injured? How about Ryan Grant's lack of success? How about offensive line penalties? How about Clifton playing at a Pro Bowl level last season and getting pwned this season? Nothing major about those huh?

If we would have polled ten analysts before the season and asked them would you think the Packers would have a better receiving corps in 2008 vs 2007 even if James Jones was a injured for a while? How many would have said no? 2 maybe?Ryan Grants success? The packers are averaging more yards rushing this year than last year. What did I miss here?

O line penalties? I guess they just caught that crazy penalty infection. It was in the water I think. A change in QB couldnt have anything to do with the same 5 guys getting more penalties even though they are now more experienced and have more time together.

Clifton? Again crazy how a pro bowl player just all of a sudden sucked and it came out of left field? The brilliant TT didnt even see it coming.

You are basing your big "changes" based on current results. Obviously the results of this team have not been good or we wouldnt even be having this discussion. If the Pack was 9-1 you think anybody would be saying it was a bad choice? Come on.

The only major change before the season on offense here was favre. That cant even be argued. The results of course are the whole point of this thread. The reasons for those results are up to discussion. We are all allowed to have our opinions.

Very few changes happened on defense also. Although I dont really think pointing the finger at our defense as a whole is good analysis. They have done quite well all things considering.

 

[sho nuff]

How about Ryan Grant's lack of success?

Grant is looking a lot better recently, and seems poised to have success down the stretch. Maybe Thompson should be taking some heat for not getting his deal done sooner to get him into camp sooner. Had that happened, maybe he never hurts his hamstring, and maybe he would have started playing well sooner.I think the bloom has to come off Thompson's rose a bit now. Throughout this debate over Favre, many have strongly backed Thompson, based on the fact that he had done such a good job in his tenure. After last season, it certainly seemed he had done a masterful job rebuilding the team. What a difference 10 games makes. And, while he may have been right in his evaluation of Rodgers, he still botched the handling of the Favre situation. Now look at Grant emerging, and perhaps he handled that situation poorly as well.

Agree on that about needing to get Grant signed quicker. I have no idea why they waited til even close to camp to get it started. Though, I bet once it got close and the Favre thing came up that stalled some things.Not sure about the never hurts his hammy thing as there have been several hurt their hammy's this offseason/season.Why should the bloom come off now?Nobody can say for sure whether the Grant thing had anything to do with his play the start of the year or not. He was in camp by family night. Speculation as to whether he gets hurt or not if he was in camp those extra 7 days.There are plenty of things to criticize TT for.-in the Favre issue, IMO, they both screwed up by playing everything out in the media. If Thompson was sure he was not going to let Favre back, he or Murphy should have been on a plane or got Favre on a plane the minute he said he was sure he was coming back to work something out. It should not have taken until camp for him to work things out with McCarthy.-waiting on Grant-not signing Corey Williams last year during the year to put some of it on last year's cap. Then having to franchise him...he was not worth the franchise price, but would have been nice to have this year.-along similar lines, not signing Tauscher to an extension this year. IMO, he has been the one lineman who has been consistent this year and played well.-not talking to Jennings early enough to start a deal. Now, Jennings may not have been open to it as it seems he does not want to discuss it at all during the season.-not finding a way to keep Mike Wahle-his inability to draft OlineAll that said. He inherited a team that, while it went to the playoffs, was older and had little depth and was in terrible cap shape. Right off the bat he had to let go of Sharper (I think it was that year), Wahle and Rivera. Though, see my last point above on Wahle. Also had Javon wanting more money. The next year he lets Ahman Green Walk too.And he has proven to be right on letting a few people go (Green, Walker, Rivera, and Flanagan).They are now much younger and building some nice depth (except on the Oline...if he was half as good at finding OL as he is at WRs they would be incredible). He has an eye for talent at WR for sure and has shown he will take care of the core guys that do things the right way (Driver, Kampman, Harris, Barnett).He also appears to have made a good decision at head coach.

 

[sho nuff]

No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team.

What have the Packers done with that cap space? IIRC, they had $20M of available cap space, and spent about $12M of that on Rodgers' contract extension. Have they used the other ~$8M?

Can't now other than signing anyone to replace injured players.I think they would have liked to with Jennings. And I wanted them to with Tauscher.

 

[Tau837]

No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team.

What have the Packers done with that cap space? IIRC, they had $20M of available cap space, and spent about $12M of that on Rodgers' contract extension. Have they used the other ~$8M?

Can't now other than signing anyone to replace injured players.I think they would have liked to with Jennings. And I wanted them to with Tauscher.

This seems to indicate that isn't true:

Though Ball can no longer structure contracts in which base salary increases count entirely on the 2008 cap, there’s a good chance he will begin – or perhaps already has begun – negotiations with the agents for several other players who warrant new deals. He still can use the approximately $8 million in remaining 2008 salary-cap space for prorated signing bonuses.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team.

What have the Packers done with that cap space? IIRC, they had $20M of available cap space, and spent about $12M of that on Rodgers' contract extension. Have they used the other ~$8M?

They were also able to release KGB and accelerate it all onto this year. They now have about $7.4MM, which is available for emergency signings of street FA's if necessary (http://cappage.timesfour.com/). Its not a huge issue in the Favre deal obviously, but worth mentioning I thought. I expect his salary was a minor issue in the decision.

 

[sho nuff]

No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team.

What have the Packers done with that cap space? IIRC, they had $20M of available cap space, and spent about $12M of that on Rodgers' contract extension. Have they used the other ~$8M?

Can't now other than signing anyone to replace injured players.I think they would have liked to with Jennings. And I wanted them to with Tauscher.

This seems to indicate that isn't true:

Though Ball can no longer structure contracts in which base salary increases count entirely on the 2008 cap, there’s a good chance he will begin – or perhaps already has begun – negotiations with the agents for several other players who warrant new deals. He still can use the approximately $8 million in remaining 2008 salary-cap space for prorated signing bonuses.

My mistake.So up to $8 mil more.

I know Jennings has balked at negotiating during the season.

Anyone heard if they will even try to get Tauscher locked up?

 

[parasaurolophus]

If the Packers miss the playoffs I would have rather had Favre for even just one more year. If they make the playoffs with Rodgers I will certainly admit (minus Favre winning MVP and leading the Jets to the SB which is very unlikely) that TT did his job well, at least on this one.

This is fair enough springroll and certainly reasonable people can have differing opinions on matters like this. For me, however, the point is that Thompson had to make a tough decision last summer in a huge pressure-cooker situation and without the luxury of a crystal ball to tell him what the future would hold. We will judge his decision not based on what he knew at the time but what we know after it has all played out, as you note above. Of course Thompson knows that is the case as does any professional who gets paid to make difficult decisions and run a company with forsight. Obviously, bringing Favre back would have been the easy and safe thing for a GM to do and I think many if not most GM's in the NFL would typically make the easy choice and protect their job. No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team. More importantly, it would send a bad message to the players that Thompson and McCarthy are not in charge of the team. I am very happy that Thompson had the courage to stick to his guns, not waiver under enormous pressure, and keep control of his team. I don't believe the Packers would be any better off this year with Favre, but, more importantly, I am certain this was the best move for the long-term success of the team. I think its a great time to be a Packer fan.

Agreed...and not only that...we have found out alot about Rodgers. He has handled this thing far better (not just in his play) than I think anyone could have thought. Just a complete pro about it from day 1.And its not just him. The whole team seems to have done the same and not worried about what might have been with #4. They just go out and play.Give the team and the staff alot of credit for that for sure.

i certainly do like how rodgers has handled himself about all of this. granted the pack is 5-5 so it wouldnt be good for him to cause trouble, but I dont think he would be any different if they were 8-2.

 

[Sabertooth]

No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team.

What have the Packers done with that cap space? IIRC, they had $20M of available cap space, and spent about $12M of that on Rodgers' contract extension. Have they used the other ~$8M?

Can't now other than signing anyone to replace injured players.I think they would have liked to with Jennings. And I wanted them to with Tauscher.

This seems to indicate that isn't true:

Though Ball can no longer structure contracts in which base salary increases count entirely on the 2008 cap, there’s a good chance he will begin – or perhaps already has begun – negotiations with the agents for several other players who warrant new deals. He still can use the approximately $8 million in remaining 2008 salary-cap space for prorated signing bonuses.

My mistake.So up to $8 mil more.

I know Jennings has balked at negotiating during the season.

Anyone heard if they will even try to get Tauscher locked up?

Is Tauscher an 09 FA?

 

[sho nuff]

No one would be calling for his head if he had brought Favre back and the team failed, even if it meant losing Rodgers, losing Flynn or Brohm, wasting a ton of cap space this year and next and wasting a year of development of a young team.

What have the Packers done with that cap space? IIRC, they had $20M of available cap space, and spent about $12M of that on Rodgers' contract extension. Have they used the other ~$8M?

Can't now other than signing anyone to replace injured players.I think they would have liked to with Jennings. And I wanted them to with Tauscher.

This seems to indicate that isn't true:

Though Ball can no longer structure contracts in which base salary increases count entirely on the 2008 cap, there’s a good chance he will begin – or perhaps already has begun – negotiations with the agents for several other players who warrant new deals. He still can use the approximately $8 million in remaining 2008 salary-cap space for prorated signing bonuses.

My mistake.So up to $8 mil more.

I know Jennings has balked at negotiating during the season.

Anyone heard if they will even try to get Tauscher locked up?

Is Tauscher an 09 FA?

I believe so.From what I have found he signed a 2 year extension in 2007 paying him through this season.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?i...ce=NFLHeadlines

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

This is why I think the Packers made a mistake not doing everything in their power to get Favre back.......

The Jets are playing the 10 and 0 Titans this week. The Titans have clearly been the better all around team this season, but it would not shock me if Favre had a great game and beat the Titans.

Although Rogers played a pretty good game against Tenn in wk 9 it would have been a much bigger surprise to see the Roger lead Packers win the game.

Don't get me wrong I think Rogers has a good future in this league but lets look at the Packers season so far....

Win against Minny wk 1

Win against Det wk 2

Loss against Dallas wk 3

Loss against TB wk 4

Loss against ATl wk 5

Win against Seattle wk 6

Win against Indy wk 7

Loss against Tenn wk 9

Loss against Minny wk 10

Loss against Chicago wk 11

The only real SB threat team that the Packers have beaten so far is Indy. At this point in his career its hard to get that feeling that Rogers will win those big games. I think that feeling can be felt in the locker room as well. I mean its tough to replace a HOF, MVP, SB winner presence.

Favre on the other hand still gives you that feeling even at this age on a new team, new offense and in a new environment that he will/can win any big game. This is not a hit against Rogers who as I mentioned before has a good future in this league.

I don't know maybe I am just reaching or have been caught up with to many Favre moments, but it would not shock me to see him lead this Jets team (a bad team last year) deep into the playoffs and give us some of that Favre magic.

 

[Kleck]

Win against Minny wk 1

Win against Det wk 2

Loss against Dallas wk 3

Loss against TB wk 4

Loss against ATl wk 5

Win against Seattle wk 6

Win against Indy wk 7

Loss against Tenn wk 9

Loss against Minny wk 10

Loss against Chicago wk 11

The Packers beat the Bears last week.

 

[Kleck]

At this point in his career its hard to get that feeling that Rogers will win those big games. I think that feeling can be felt in the locker room as well.

I'm not following you here. So any first year starting QB who doesn't win big games should be written off? I know people love to credit the QBs for wins and losses, but this is still a team game. Considering all Rodgers has gone through, plus the struggling line/running play for quite a few games and the defensive injuries, I think he's done quite well as a first year starter. A couple of those losses could have gone the other way with a healthy defense.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

At this point in his career its hard to get that feeling that Rogers will win those big games. I think that feeling can be felt in the locker room as well.

I'm not following you here. So any first year starting QB who doesn't win big games should be written off? I know people love to credit the QBs for wins and losses, but this is still a team game. Considering all Rodgers has gone through, plus the struggling line/running play for quite a few games and the defensive injuries, I think he's done quite well as a first year starter. A couple of those losses could have gone the other way with a healthy defense.

Where has he been written off?I was simply making the comparisson that a team would have more confidence going into a big game with a proven player vs an unproven player. That is not a hit against Rogers who I have already claimed will most likely get a chance to get to that status.

But if you had the choice right now of having Favre lead your team to a victory in a big game vs Rogers who would you pick? The Packers ultimately had that chance. Sure Favre was not perfect in the ordeal but they had a chance for the now and the future.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

So you don't know which games they've won and lost or how to spell his name but you can tell he's not a big-game QB. Thanks.

 

[CalBear]

But if you had the choice right now of having Favre lead your team to a victory in a big game vs Rogers who would you pick? The Packers ultimately had that chance. Sure Favre was not perfect in the ordeal but they had a chance for the now and the future.

The last time Favre was supposed to lead his team to victory in a big game, he went 19/35 and threw two INTs, one in the fourth quarter, and one in overtime costing them the game. He got bailed out on the fourth-quarter interception when McQuarters fumbled it with Green Bay recovering at the NYG 19; Favre failed to move the team and they settled for a tying FG. Green Bay had two more possessions in the fourth quarter of a tie game and failed to get a first down; Favre went 2-6 for 12 yards on those two possessions, with the two completions being short passes on third and long that didn't come close to picking up the first down.All QBs have bad games. All QBs have games where they lost it at the end. But Favre has a history littered with those kinds of mistakes; it seems crazy to think that at this point in his career he could have led a team like this year's Packers to the Super Bowl. He would have blown it at some point. If you keep him on, you're just delaying the inevitable and not giving yourself any real chance to do something.

 

[Kleck]

At this point in his career its hard to get that feeling that Rogers will win those big games. I think that feeling can be felt in the locker room as well.

I'm not following you here. So any first year starting QB who doesn't win big games should be written off? I know people love to credit the QBs for wins and losses, but this is still a team game. Considering all Rodgers has gone through, plus the struggling line/running play for quite a few games and the defensive injuries, I think he's done quite well as a first year starter. A couple of those losses could have gone the other way with a healthy defense.

Where has he been written off?I was simply making the comparisson that a team would have more confidence going into a big game with a proven player vs an unproven player. That is not a hit against Rogers who I have already claimed will most likely get a chance to get to that status.

But if you had the choice right now of having Favre lead your team to a victory in a big game vs Rogers who would you pick? The Packers ultimately had that chance. Sure Favre was not perfect in the ordeal but they had a chance for the now and the future.

At this point in his career its hard to get that feeling that Rogers will win those big games.

This is why I said I wasn't following you here, as in I didn't quite understand where you were going with this. The way it read to me was for not just this year, but also future years. I see what you were saying now.

 

[Tau837]

But if you had the choice right now of having Favre lead your team to a victory in a big game vs Rogers who would you pick? The Packers ultimately had that chance. Sure Favre was not perfect in the ordeal but they had a chance for the now and the future.

The last time Favre was supposed to lead his team to victory in a big game, he went 19/35 and threw two INTs, one in the fourth quarter, and one in overtime costing them the game. He got bailed out on the fourth-quarter interception when McQuarters fumbled it with Green Bay recovering at the NYG 19; Favre failed to move the team and they settled for a tying FG. Green Bay had two more possessions in the fourth quarter of a tie game and failed to get a first down; Favre went 2-6 for 12 yards on those two possessions, with the two completions being short passes on third and long that didn't come close to picking up the first down.All QBs have bad games. All QBs have games where they lost it at the end. But Favre has a history littered with those kinds of mistakes; it seems crazy to think that at this point in his career he could have led a team like this year's Packers to the Super Bowl. He would have blown it at some point. If you keep him on, you're just delaying the inevitable and not giving yourself any real chance to do something.

I know this isn't your main point, but it seems you are saying Favre has not had any big games this season... so New England on the road with the division lead at stake in the second half of the season isn't a big game? Favre played very well in that game and led them to the victory, and right now that game could very well end up being the difference in winning the division and possibly getting a first round bye in the playoffs.

 

[sho nuff]

This is why I think the Packers made a mistake not doing everything in their power to get Favre back.......The Jets are playing the 10 and 0 Titans this week. The Titans have clearly been the better all around team this season, but it would not shock me if Favre had a great game and beat the Titans. Although Rogers played a pretty good game against Tenn in wk 9 it would have been a much bigger surprise to see the Roger lead Packers win the game.Don't get me wrong I think Rogers has a good future in this league but lets look at the Packers season so far....Win against Minny wk 1Win against Det wk 2Loss against Dallas wk 3Loss against TB wk 4Loss against ATl wk 5Win against Seattle wk 6Win against Indy wk 7Loss against Tenn wk 9Loss against Minny wk 10Loss against Chicago wk 11The only real SB threat team that the Packers have beaten so far is Indy. At this point in his career its hard to get that feeling that Rogers will win those big games. I think that feeling can be felt in the locker room as well. I mean its tough to replace a HOF, MVP, SB winner presence. Favre on the other hand still gives you that feeling even at this age on a new team, new offense and in a new environment that he will/can win any big game. This is not a hit against Rogers who as I mentioned before has a good future in this league. I don't know maybe I am just reaching or have been caught up with to many Favre moments, but it would not shock me to see him lead this Jets team (a bad team last year) deep into the playoffs and give us some of that Favre magic.

What big bad SB teams has Favre beat this year? The Cards...Ill give him that.But again...you are talking team vs. 1 player. Favre is not the entire thing in NY right now.And Rodgers is not the only thing in GB right now.And Favre still gives me the feeling that at anytime he can throw up a stinker and cost his team a win. I don't get that feeling with Rodgers in GB right now.And again, the decision was not just made for this season alone.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

So you don't know which games they've won and lost or how to spell his name but you can tell he's not a big-game QB. Thanks.

Usually I would not respond to such a pointless post, but due to being a friday afternoon and being really bored at work I want to say thanks for your contribution to the post (sense the sarcasm yet)? I would also like to say if you could be a real friend and proof read all of my posts before I submit them that would be greatly appreciated. I am sorry if my posts on a message board are not proof read to a "t". Happy?

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

Well I can see how you could make this mistake as Aaron Rodgers' name has barely been in the press at all over the previous 8 months.

 

[Raider Nation]

This is getting bumped tonight win or lose.... just wanted to get an early start.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Listen...it doesn't matter because Favre hasn't been playing that well this year either and the O-line and D-line and D-Backs, Favre can't play all those positions and I am pleased so far with Rodgers' play.

Especially tonight.

 

[phthalatemagic]

We got a taste of the typical Favre game, 3 picks

 

[teamroc]

What big bad SB teams has Favre beat this year? The Cards...Ill give him that.But again...you are talking team vs. 1 player. Favre is not the entire thing in NY right now.And Rodgers is not the only thing in GB right now.And Favre still gives me the feeling that at anytime he can throw up a stinker and cost his team a win. I don't get that feeling with Rodgers in GB right now.And again, the decision was not just made for this season alone.

Add the Titans.And there goes GB playoff hopes. With some luck they might go 3-2 over the next 5 and finish 8-8. Tasty.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

More than Favre they need a fireman because much of that defense is still in flames and the rest is smoldering badly.

 

[ScottyFargo]

He kept his composure through it all, and that's all I was looking for, the decision was made for long term, they weren't thinking about how he'd perform against New Orleans.

 

[Chachi]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright. Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

 

[Sabertooth]

I thought Rodgers would have a better night. Losing Tauscher early really hurt. Rodgers did appear off today though. His throws were just not accurate.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright. Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

He really did stink it up last night. It's shameful that the Packers only scored 29 points. Rodgers has completed 63.5% of his passes, 17 TDs, 9 INTs, 90+ QB rating. Considering he has started a grand total of 11 games in his entire career, I'd say that is pretty damn impressive.

 

[meanjoegreen]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright. Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

He really did stink it up last night. It's shameful that the Packers only scored 29 points. Rodgers has completed 63.5% of his passes, 17 TDs, 9 INTs, 90+ QB rating. Considering he has started a grand total of 11 games in his entire career, I'd say that is pretty damn impressive.

 

[Ozymandias]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright. Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

He really did stink it up last night. It's shameful that the Packers only scored 29 points. Rodgers has completed 63.5% of his passes, 17 TDs, 9 INTs, 90+ QB rating. Considering he has started a grand total of 11 games in his entire career, I'd say that is pretty damn impressive.

 

[Phase of the Game]

John Clayton stated on ESPN radio this morning that it is widely accepted around the league that the Packers would be a better team with Favre. Clayton stated you don't go to a good quarterback when you have a great quarterback.

 

[Phase of the Game]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright. Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

He really did stink it up last night. It's shameful that the Packers only scored 29 points. Rodgers has completed 63.5% of his passes, 17 TDs, 9 INTs, 90+ QB rating. Considering he has started a grand total of 11 games in his entire career, I'd say that is pretty damn impressive.

5-6 won loss record so far

 

[munchkin]

I was thinking about this post during last nights game as the Green Bay secondary was looking like they had Ellis Hobbs and Delthea O'Neil in on their days off. Brees was ridiculously accurate last night and there was little pressure on him. It doesn't help an offense if the defense and special teams give up big plays all over the field. Jennings fell down on the first pick, Nelson stopped his route short on the second and I didn't see the third. According to the GB radio announcer Rodgers was throwing lazers in the first half. I don't think his understanding of the offense changed that much during the 15 minute intermission.

 

[Pipes]

John Clayton stated on ESPN radio this morning that it is widely accepted around the league that the Packers would be a better team with Favre. Clayton stated you don't go to a good quarterback when you have a great quarterback.

So what? With the way this defense is they aren't a Super Bowl team even with Favre and the only reason to bring Favre back was to go to the Super Bowl. May as well take their lumps now and get Rodgers some seasoning. I just can't believe how bad their defense has gotten from last year to this year. Corey Williams was good but not that good.

 

[Phase of the Game]

John Clayton stated on ESPN radio this morning that it is widely accepted around the league that the Packers would be a better team with Favre. Clayton stated you don't go to a good quarterback when you have a great quarterback.

So what? With the way this defense is they aren't a Super Bowl team even with Favre and the only reason to bring Favre back was to go to the Super Bowl. May as well take their lumps now and get Rodgers some seasoning. I just can't believe how bad their defense has gotten from last year to this year. Corey Williams was good but not that good.

I was just pointing out what Clayton said. If you have issues with it I suggest you take that up with him. You can contact him at ESPN. He also did mention that those in the NFL that think the Packers would be better with Favre doesn't sit well with some Packer fans.

 

[sho nuff]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright. Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

Ill start with this one.Bust? Really? Are you freakin kidding me?He was not great at all in the 2nd half. Missed some in the first half too. He played poorly no doubt.Does that make him a bust? Not even freakin close.And for anyone who thinks this was all on Rodgers and ol #4 would have pulled it off? Again...is he going to play DB?Are you all going to blame Rodgers for the porous defense through the first drive of the 3rd quarter? GB was killing in time of posession and the D could not stop anyone. Rodgers and the O were scoring just fine.It reminded me of the Indy shootout a few years ago. In the end, they had far more firepower than our defense could handle and Rodgers made some mistakes that hurt any comeback chances.

 

[sho nuff]

John Clayton stated on ESPN radio this morning that it is widely accepted around the league that the Packers would be a better team with Favre. Clayton stated you don't go to a good quarterback when you have a great quarterback.

People said all offseason that the team would probably be better "THIS YEAR" with Favre. I said as much over and over during the whole will they trade him deal.Early in the season, I was not so sure with how Favre was playing. He has turned it up a notch the past 3 weeks and shown more of what he did last season.

 

[ScottyFargo]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright.

Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

Ill start with this one.Bust? Really? Are you freakin kidding me?

He was not great at all in the 2nd half. Missed some in the first half too. He played poorly no doubt.

Does that make him a bust? Not even freakin close.

And for anyone who thinks this was all on Rodgers and ol #4 would have pulled it off? Again...is he going to play DB?

Are you all going to blame Rodgers for the porous defense through the first drive of the 3rd quarter? GB was killing in time of posession and the D could not stop anyone. Rodgers and the O were scoring just fine.

It reminded me of the Indy shootout a few years ago. In the end, they had far more firepower than our defense could handle and Rodgers made some mistakes that hurt any comeback chances.

I tried to tell 'em all that like, at the half man, but it's like NOBODY LISTENS here! I feel like I'm taking Crazy Pills! THEY HIRED RODGERS TO BE A QB, NOT THE DEFENSE, GUYS! COME ON!

 

[sho nuff]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Put me down for the over.Rodgers really stunk it up tonight, the kid just isn't that bright. Can we label him a bust yet? (Not fantasy, but NFL)

He really did stink it up last night. It's shameful that the Packers only scored 29 points. Rodgers has completed 63.5% of his passes, 17 TDs, 9 INTs, 90+ QB rating. Considering he has started a grand total of 11 games in his entire career, I'd say that is pretty damn impressive.

5-6 won loss record so far

Must all be Rodgers huh?Favre never had a bad record did he?

 

[sho nuff]

The early line has the O/U for sho nuff posts in this thread tomorrow at 28.

Depends...whats the over under on how many posts you and phase make that don't really have anything to do with Favre or Rodgers (like phase with posting the win/loss record?)Anyway...after the next few minutes...you won't see me much today.Im helping to care for my 4 year old and 10 month old with stomach viruses and fighting one of myself.Id blame the game last night for the way I feel, but this started well before kickoff.